NBSIR 78-1448

Full-Scale Burning Behavior of

Curtains and Draperies

L. Dow Moore, Research Associate

PPG Industries

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Center for Fire Research

Institute for Applied Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

March 1978

Final Report

U S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

NBSIR 78-1448

FULL-SCALE BURNING BEHAVIOR OF

CURTAINS AND DRAPERIES

L. Dow Moore, Research Associate

PPG Industries

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Center for Fire Research

Institute for Applied Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

March 1978

Final Report

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Juanita M. Kreps, Secretary

Dr. Sidney Harman, Under Secretary

Jordan J. Baruch, Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, Ernest Ambler, Director

CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF FIGURES iv

LIST OF TABLES V

ABSTRACT 1

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. SCOPE OF EXPERIMENTS 2

3. TEST OF INSTRUMENTATION AND CONDITIONS 2

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3 4.1. Burning Rate 4 4.2. Burning Time 4 4.3. Ignition of Wall and Ceiling Panels 4 4.4. Air Temperatures in Room and Doorway 6 4.5. Total Heat Flux and Radiant Flux 7 4.6. Smoke Generation 7 4.7. Gas Analysis 8 4.8. Draperies as Flashover Promoters 8 4.9. Test Results 9

5. CONCLUSIONS 10

5.1. Ignition of Wall and Ceiling Materials 10

5.2. Smoke Generation 10

5.3. Gas Analysis 10

5.4. Drapery Ignition - Open Versus Closed 11

6. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 11

7. REFERENCES 11

iii
LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 1. C/D Hazard Analysis 29

. igure 2. Instrumentation of Wall behind Drape 29

Figure 3. Exp. S16 (100% Cotton Print 3.64 oz/yd 2

) - 16 Seconds

after Ignition 30

Figure 4. Exp. S16 - 23 Seconds 30

Figure 5. Exp. S16 - 27 Seconds 31

Figure 6. Exp. S16 - 44 Seconds 31

Figure 7. Exp. S16 - 76 Seconds 32

Figure 8. Exp. S16 - 89 Seconds 32

Figure 9. Exp. S16 100% Cotton 3.64 oz/yd 2 (Light) Closed Position. . 33

Figure 10. Ceiling Tile and Wall Paneling Layout for Verification

Experiments No. 21 , 22 , 23 & 24 33

Figure 11. Center of Room Temperatures versus Time - Exp. S17 9.65

oz/yd 2 50% Cotton/50% Polyester 34

Figure 12. Heat Flux versus Time - Exp. S17 34

Figure 13. Radiant Flux versus Time - Exp. S17 35

Figure 14. Exp. S17 - 78 Seconds 35

Figure 15. Exp. S17 - 103 Seconds 36

Figure 16. Exp. S17 - 116 Seconds 36

Figure 17. Drapery Consumption and Smoke Generation - Exp. S17

50% Cotton/50% Polyester 37

Figure 18. CO at Top of Door (ppm) versus Time - Exp. S17 37

Figure 19. C0 2 at Top of Door versus Time - Exp. S17 38

IV
LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1. Fabric Selection for 5x2x2 Factorial Experimental

Design 12

Table 2. Wall and Ceiling Test Panels 12

Table 3. Weight of Curtains and Draperies Burned 13

Table 4. Burning Time: Aerial and Mass Burning Rates 14

Table 5. Heat of Combustion of Various Fabrics by Oxygen Bomb

Method 15

Table 6. Energy to Wall and Number of Test Panels Ignited 16

Table 7. Ranking of Samples According to Area under Heat Flux Meter

Curves 17

Table 8. Number of High and Low Panels Ignited by Heavy and Light

Draperies 18

Table 9. Verification of Panel Ignitions 19

Table 10. Doorway and Center of Room Temperatures 20

Table 11. Physiological Effects of Elevated Temperatures 21

Table 12. Peak Radiant Flux Generated by Drape (Measured 5 Feet above

Floor and 5 Inches from Drape) Total Peak Heat Flux

Measured above Drape 22

Table 13. Peak Smoke Generation 23

Table 14. Toxic Gas and Oxygen Depletion Produced by Burning

Draperies — Peak Concentrations 24

Table 15. Effect of Carbon Monoxide Exposure on Humans 25

Table 16. Effect of Carbon Dioxide Exposure on Humans 25

Table 17. Effects of Oxygen Depletion on Humans. . 26

< Table 18. Physiological Response to Various Concentrations of Hydrogen

Cyanide in Air - Mass 26

Table 19. Weight Losses in Chair — Drapery Burns (Exp. 16 and 20) . . 27

Table 20. Time to Ignition and Flashover in Chair Test 27

Table 21. Comparison of Chair and Drapery Experiments - Temperature,

Heat Flux Measurements, Toxic Gases 28

v
23J3AT 30 T2I

3P53

X.l

S' I

8 I M

01

31

VI

81

ei

os

is

ss

8 S

£S

OS

OS

as

3 S

VS

VS

8 S

v>;

; 7 _ f x&xioJoe'I £ :: S x 0 xod noxd09l92 oi^ds3

npxssd

‘

' al3ns3 daaT pnx'lx90 5ns IIsW

* • bgnmH asxxsqsTQ 5ns anxsdxuO do dripxsW

* • " -9ds5I pnxnmS 3asM 5ns IsxxoA rsmxT pnxnnuS

li'of! narv'xO Y<d 35lxds3 auoiisV do noxdandnroO do ds 9H

boridsM

- . . osjinpx 2!9nsu, das'i 10 'isdrnui'l 5ns I IsW od vpnsnS

i;> xu 1 1 dss.-I isbns B9~j

' od pnxbioooA a9lqms2 do pnxdnsH

rj 5ns yxsoli Ya' bedxnpl slensd woJ 5ns ripxH do X 9dmnM

* anoxdxnpl Isnsa do noxdso xdxx 9V

a9njJdsi9q(Ti9T moo3 do X9dn9D 5ns Y£W-:too(I agxndsxaqmsT bsdsvela do adooddS IsoxpoIoxaY/13

? ° ;1: ~!c c bsnnassM) sqsnO ycf bedsnangD xu!3 dnsxbsH dse3 xuI3 dseH .3693 IsdoT (sqsxa mond asrionl 0 5ns xooI3

9qsnd gvods bonnassM

sMom3 ds93

pnxnxna yq booubdia noxd9lq9CI nspyxO 5ns asO oxxoT

3noxdsndn9onoD ds93 — aoxnoqsna

snsrnnH no 9xnaoqx3 obxxonoM nodxsO do d09dd3

'

no 9Xuaoqx3 9bxxoxCI nodnsD do do9dd3

no noxd9lq9d n9pYxO do adosdd3

nsponbyH do anoidsndnsonoO anoxxsV od ganoqaoH IsoxpoIoxaYda

- nx A nx 9bxnsYD

,

- (OS 5ns 31 . qx3) anxuH Y«qsiCI — nxsrlD nx agaaoJ dripxsW

daoT xxsriD nx X9vodasI3 5ns noxdxnpl od smxT

,9dud6X9qm9T - adnsnunsqxS Y^sqsnd 5ns xxsriD do noaxnsqmoD

oxxoT , adnsmannassM xul 3 ds 9H

. I

.S

. 8

. f>

.0

.3

.V

.8

.e

.01

. ii

.si

.81

. M

.01

.31

. VI

.81

.ei

.os

.is

9ldsT

9ldsT

9ldsT

sldsT

oldsT

sldsT

oldsT

9ldsT

9ldsT

sldsT

9ldsT

OldsT

9ldsT

9 1 dsT

9ldsT

oldsT

oldsT

9ldsT

9ldsT

9ldsT

oldsT

V
FULL-SCALE BURNING BEHAVIOR OF CURTAINS AND DRAPERIES

L. Dow Moore

To better understand the burning in room fire development,

38 full-scale drapery and curtain burn experiments were conducted

in a 3 x 4 . 9 m (10 x 16 ft) room. The variables investigated

included fabric and lining type, fabric weight, and position of

the draperies (open vs closed) . As each burning experiment

progressed a number of conditions were continuously monitored

such as rate of drapery consumption, air temperature increase,

smoke and toxic gas generation, and radiant energy developed.

Ignition of sample wall and ceiling panels was also monitored.

Key words: Curtains; draperies; flammable fabrics; full-scale fires.

1.

INTRODUCTION

2 A recent report [1] by Moore and Vickers surveyed 286 fire accidents m

which curtains and/or draperies (C/Ds) were involved. The case history records

in the Flammable Fabrics Accident Case and Testing System (FFACTS) file at the

National Bureau of Standards (NBS) contained 147 cases, those at the National

Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 73 cases, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) 52 cases, and a literature survey 14.

The cases were analyzed in detail attempting to ascertain the extent to

which these products represented potential fire hazards. In the FFACTS file,

when C/Ds were involved in a fire, 63.5% of the time they were the first

object to be ignited. Matches headed the list of ignition sources and the

fires started most frequently in the living room. When the fire spread

sequence was known, burning C/Ds most frequently ignited ceiling and wall

materials of the house, thereby facilitating spread to other rooms of the

house. Death incidence per case ranged from 0.23 to 0.84 depending on the

set of case history records. The average for all cases that recorded property

and contents financial losses was $8000 per incident.

To answer some of the questions generated by the survey a series of pilot

studies was conducted in which full sized draperies were burned in a 3 x 4 . 9 m

(10 x 16 ft) room. Answers to the following questions were sought:

1. What type of wall and ceiling materials were ignited by flaming C/Ds?

2. Would the radiant energy from a burning drapery represent a risk

to a person entering the room?

3. What level of air temperature would be reached in a room and what

would be the gradient from floor to ceiling?

4. How much carbon monoxide would a C/D produce? Would the amount of

smoke vary with type of fiber?

5. Would the presence of a C/D in a room where other furnishings are burning decrease the flashover time by carrying the flame to the

ceiling area where combustible gases are collecting?

When this work was in progress the author was a Research Associate at the

National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C.

Numbers in brackets refer to the references listed under section 7 of this

paper.

1
2. SCOPE OF EXPERIMENTS

In the selection of typical curtains and draperies to be used in the

accident simulation tests, there were many variables to consider. The C/D

configurations ranged from 0.034 kg/m2 (~1 oz/yd 2

) sheers to short cottage

curtains, to open weave casements, to heavy lined pinch pleated draperies

weighing 0.371 kg/m2 (10.9 oz/yd 2

) — draped vertically and tied back. There

are many types of fabric weaves and types of fibers and blends. Common

linings range from separate layers of cotton fabric to acrylic foam backing.

From the previous survey report the largest portion of C/D fires occurred

in the living room and was ignited by a match. For this reason it was decided

to select full length 2.13 m (84 in) long pinch draperies as the configuration

to be tested as they would most likely be found in the living room. A nominal

1.22 to 1.27 m (48 to 50 in) wide drapery was selected because this was the

size most frequently sold in the U.S. according to marketing data. This width

is tailored to fit curtain rods 0.86 to 1.02 m (34 to 40 in). With one exception, Experiment No. 15 — the rayon/polyester sheer, all draperies were com- posed of a pair of panels.

To derive the maximum amount of information from the set of experiments

a statistical design was utilized. After reviewing estimated future market

trends of types of fibers to be used in C/D fabrics, five fabrics were chosen

(see table 1). Two weights of each fabric, i.e., light and heavy, were

included. In addition, the draperies were tested in the closed as well as the open position, thus making a total of 5 x 2 x 2 or 20 experiments. Randomization procedures were used to select the burn sequence. As these fabrics in

two different weights were not readily available in ready-made draperies, they

were custom made.

In addition, 12 other ready-made C/Ds were burned to get some knowledge

of the behavior of sheers, fiberglass flocked with rayon, casements, foambacked draperies, etc. To test the theory that when a C/D burns in a flaming

room environment, the flashover time is decreased, two additional experiments

were performed.

The statistically designed experiments were numbered SI thru S20 and the

others 7 thru 20.

3. TEST INSTRUMENTATION AND CONDITIONS 3

To simulate real life accident conditions, full-scale C/Ds were burned

in e 3 x 4.9 m (10 x 16 ft) room totally closed except for one doorway directly

opposite the C/D (see fig. 1). The top of the open 0.76 x 2.0 m (30 x 79 in)

doorway was 0.33 m (13 in) below the 2.34 m (92 in) ceiling. To enable the

installation of test wall panels and lines of thermocouples behind the drapery

a window was not installed. The ceiling was composed of Class A mineral fiber

tile and the walls of 16 mm (5/8 in) Type X (fire resistant) gypsum board

except for the panel behind the drapery. This panel was 1.2 x 2.3 m (48 x

92 in) by 16 mm of asbestos sheet, with 15 x 15 cm (6x6 in) hole cut-outs

for insertion of various wall panels (see table 2) at two heights above the

floor (see fig. 2). The first line of test panels was located 1.1 m (3 ft

6 in) from the ceiling and the second 10 cm (4 in) . To eliminate the edge

effects the crack between the specimen and the board was filled with white

non-burning caulking and allowed to dry.

A 0.9 m (3 ft) length of 5.7 cm (2-1/4 in) wide white pine window molding

coated with two layers of white latex paint was nailed to the asbestos board

as shown in figure 2.

The identification of commercial products is made in order to specify

adequately the experimental procedure, and does not imply recommendation

or endorsement by the National Bureau of Standards.

2

3
To measure the shape effect a 10 cm x 2 m (4 in x 80 in) piece of Panel

No. 3 (see table 2) was nailed to the surface of the asbestos sheet also

shown in the figure.

Test ceiling panels 15 cm by 15 cm (6x6 in) were inserted in the

ceiling 20.3 cm (8 in) from the wall and caulked (see table 2).

The test drapery was hung with short hooks on a curtain rod 10 cm (4 in)

from the wall with the top of the drapery approximately 13 cm (5 in) below

the ceiling. The curtain rod was attached to two flexible wires leading

through the ceiling over two low friction pulleys and horizontally to a single load cell.

The two-panel drape was arranged on the rod so the horizontal coverage

was 1 m (40 in). ' This gave an overlap of the right panel over the left of

8 to 10 cm (3 to 4 in) . For the closed draperies the fabric to wall surface

ratio was 2.1 to 1 and in the open position it averaged 4 . 1 to 1 . In all

tests the bottom center edge of the right panel was ignited with a "book type"

match

Vertical thermocouple "trees" were placed (1) 1.2 m (4 ft) from the

back wall and 46 cm (18 in) to the left of the door — drape centerline, and

(2) in the center of the doorway.

A total heat flux transducer whose range was 0-10 W/cm 2 of the Gardon

type was placed flush in the ceiling on the drape centerline and 25 cm (10 in)

from the wall. The radiant flux meter (0-2 W/cm range) used the SchmidtBoelter thermopile and was faced with an Intran 2 window with a view angle

of 150 degrees. It was placed 1.5 m (5 ft) above the floor, 1.5 m (5 ft) from

the back wall, 84 cm (33 in) to the right of drape — door centerline, and

pointed at the top center of the drapery.

Smoke was measured by a vertical light beam and photocell placed in the

center of, and just inside, the doorway. The beam was 2.34 m (92 in) long.

The photocell was inset in a hole in the ceiling approximately 12.7 cm (5 in)

deep thus keeping smoke film contamination of the lens during the latter part

of the run at a minimum.

The evolution of toxic gases was continuously monitored near the vertical

centerline of the doorway in two locations. M.S.A. Model 300 and Model 303

Lira units were used to monitor C0 2 and CO respectively. Oxygen was measured

by an 0 2 cell (Part #514010) supplied by Bacharach Instrument Division of Ambac

Industries Inc.

Output from instruments were recorded every four seconds for each data

point and printed on paper as well as magnetic tape. The mag tape was then

processed by computer.

Visual records of the burning draperies were made using 16 mm film and

35 mm slides. Both were taken through the open doorway with the photographer

approximately 3 m (10 ft) outside the room. Both sweep second and digital

clocks were used to provide a visual record of the time elapse.

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The 18 different types of fabric burned had almost 18 different burning

characteristics. This was not necessarily evident by visual observation but

was evident by examination of the rate of burning curves, smoke generation and room temperature distribution curves. Time clocks were started after the

bottom right panel edge was lit with a match with the lighting process

requiring from 2-4 seconds actual time. Heavy drapes required the longest

ignition time. Ten to 30 seconds were then usually required for the flame

3
to make some headway and start its rapid rise to the ceiling. Figures 3 thru 8 are a photographic record of test S16, 100% cotton print 0.12 kg/m2 (3.64 oz/yd 2 ), closed position, showing the typical V-shaped burning pattern.

Figure 9 is a copy of the computer printout curve showing the drapery con- sumption rate and smoke generation. Again these curves, especially the

drapery consumption curve, cannot be considered average or typical; however,

they are given as examples. 4.1.

Burning Rate

When a vertically hung fabric is ignited at the bottom, the flame travels

vertically very rapidly for at least three reasons: (1) there is ready access

to oxygen, (2) hot air has a bouyancy effect which carries the flame upward,

and (3) fabric above the flame is being preheated which increases its burning

rate. Referring again to figure 9, the first part of the drapery consumption

curve, with a slope of 1.46 %/s, represents the right-hand panel burning rate.

As soon as this panel is essentially consumed and flame advances to the left

and down the left panel (see fig. 6 at 44 s) the burning rate drops to about

half at a rate of 0.72 %/s. In some of the other experiments this change in

slope is not always so clear cut as some fabrics burned faster in the fill

direction (horizontal in this case) then the 0.1233 kg/m2 cotton. Also, some fabrics burned 1/2 or 3/4 of the way to the top and parts fell off affecting

the rate of burning of the left panel

4.2.

Burning Time

Considering the uniform burning curve of the lightweight cotton drapery,

figure 9, it is easy to estimate a total burning time of 80 seconds. In some experiments, however, when the flame travels part way to the ceiling and a portion of the panel drops to the floor, it is impossible to judge an accurate

burning time. The mass burning rate in most all cases reached a uniform value

(slope) and was therefore used to calculate a theorical burning time for the

right panel. Theorical burning times for right panels are listed in table 4 and these values were obtained by dividing 1/2 the drapery weight by the mass burning rate provided by the load cell.

For lightweight draperies the burning time for the right panel (ignited

at the bottom) ranged from 11 to 42 seconds. For the heavyweights the range

was from 22 to 138 seconds. In the statistical group of 20 experiments the

lightweight fabrics burned 2 to 4 times as fast as the heavier materials.

This was with the exception of the heavy acrylic with a calculated burn time

of 31 seconds. This fabric melted and dripped so profusely that the accuracy

of this time calculation is questionable.

4.3.

Ignition of Wall and Ceiling Panels

One of the findings in the survey report [1] was that some types of cur- tains or draperies ignited walls or ceilings and thus could aid in the spread

of fire throughout a dwelling. Some items such as wall paneling cannot be

readily ignited with a match or momentary electrical arc, but are susceptible

to a large ignition source (a drapery could be considered a large ignition

source). Lie [2] indicates the probability of ignition is a function of

both heat flux and time of exposure. In other words the residence time of

the flame playing on each cm 2 is one of the main controlling factors in the

ignition of the surface. For example, a match will usually ignite a heavy

drapery if allowed to be in contact with a heavy drapery for 3-8 seconds;

however, no ignition will take place if the contact time is 1 or 2 seconds.

4
What was the relationship of the energy input to the number of test

panels ignited? The test panels are listed in table 2 and their locations in

figure 2. After each burn all panels were examined for areas that had been

ignited. In the test panel "count" the long panel, number three, was not

included as often since it was ignited on the bottom end by part of a drapery

falling to the floor. Another exception was panel five (the Class A ceiling

tile) which was never ignited in any tests. Thus the total number of panels

that could ignite in any test would be 10.

A method of ranking the C/Ds with respect to number of panels ignited

would be the use of the total heat-flux data. A typical curve of the output

of the meter located in the ceiling is illustrated by figure 12. Integrating

under the curves produced the total heat measured by the meter (W-s/cm 2 or J/cm2 ). This integrated value for each experiment is listed in table 7 with

the number of panels ignited. The value ranges from 28 J/cm2 for the number 15

polyester sheer to 483 for the S18 heavy acrylic drapery. The ranking here

is apparently a range of 180-190 J/cm2 below which very few wall or ceiling

panels were ignited. In other words, the lightweight C/Ds did not ignite the

wall or ceiling panels, whereas the heavy draperies which produced areas under

the heat flux meter curves of approximately 200 or above ignited as many as

8 of the 10 panels.

In addition, it was hypothesized that as the flame moved up the wall,

its intensity would increase and possibly the ceiling as well as the wall

panels near the ceiling would be ignited, whereas the lower wall panels would

not. This was true for the heavyweight draperies (see table 8) . Only two

ceiling panels were ignited by the lightweight curtains.

Is it possible to extrapolate from the ignition of 15.2 x 15.2 cm (5 x

5 in) specimens to full wall and ceiling covered conditions? A number of

factors such as heat conductivity and raw edge exposure would vary. To check

on the validity of this extrapolation four additional experiments (Nos. 21-24)

were conducted using the arrangement indicated in figure 10. The room size

and drapery position were the same as used previously. The wall was composed

of two sheets of "chestnut finished" Class C plywood paneling (Panel No. 3, see table 2). The Class D tile (low density cellulosic ceiling tile) (Panel

No. 6) was installed to cover a suspended ceiling area of 2.44 m (8 ft) by

1.22 m (4 ft). A 2.5 cm (1 in) cove molding covered the junction of wall and

ceiling and the window trim molding (Panel No. 1) was painted and installed

as indicated. All wall materials were nailed to Type X gypsum board and the

gypsum board showing through the window opening was painted black. Thus,

four "items" could be ignited, i.e., the wall paneling, window molding, cove

molding, and ceiling tile.

Instrumentation consisted of duplicating some of the previous installations — namely the load cell, heat flux meter in the ceiling, and the

"center" of room thermocouple tree.

To test the hypothesis two heavy and two lightweight draperies were

chosen. They were identical to those previously burned. The lightweights

had not ignited any of the ten 15 x 15 cm panels and of the heavyweight

draperies, one had ignited 7 and the other 8 panels.

Table No. 9 lists the results of these four experiments and the data

obtained from the comparison test made with 15 x 15 cm panels. As may be

noted the room temperatures, peak heat fluxes, and total energy deviate from

previous results and not always in the same direction. For example, an increase in peak heat flux does not necessarily mean a total energy increase.

However, three out of the four experiments did verify the previous ignition

tests. The heavy draperies (Exp. 21 and 22) ignited all four of the items in

the full-scale tests. The lightweight acetate drapery did not ignite any of

the items; however, the lightweight 50% rayon/50% cotton ignited all four.

5
Comparing Experiment 23 with SI reveals the energy as "seen" by the ceiling

meter increased from 119 to 217 J/cm2 — almost doubled. (Why should this

value double for the same drapery? In Experiment 25 the new sheets of "chestnut finished" plywood presented a smooth reflective surface to the burning

drapery, whereas, the darkened asbestos board in SI absorbed considerable

energy.) This probably explains the ignition of the four items as the break

point from non-ignitor to ignitor in table 7 appears to occur near 180 to 190

J/cm2.

4.4. Air Temperatures in Room and Doorway

As the C/Ds began to burn, hot combustion gases and heated air collected

near the ceiling. Vertical temperature gradients were measured for each

test. Figure 11 shows Experiment S17 (heavy, 50% cotton/50% polyester) where

the peak temperature 25 mm (1 in) below the ceiling was 445°C. Other tests

produced a high of 662°C for Exp. S9 (heavy 100% acrylic-open) and a low of

118°C (Exp. 15 sheer, 70% rayon/30% polyester) . Table 10 lists doorway and

center of room temperatures 1.65 m (65 in) above the floor — a position

related to a possible hazard to a person in the room. This temperature

ranged from a low of 44°C for the lightweight 100% polyester to 288°C for

the heavy acrylic. In general the heavy fabrics produced increased temperatures than the lighter by a factor ranging from 1.4 to 2.5 times.

Is this air temperature high enough to cause physiological damage to the mucus membranes, lungs and to the skin of humans? Some of the physiological

effects of air temperatures published by Pryor et al . [8] are listed in

table 11. Six of the 1.65 m (65 in) above the floor temperatures listed in

table 9 are in the 150°C danger zone. At 150°C, mouth breathing is difficult and it is considered the temperature limit for escape. In Experiment

No. S17 (see fig. 11) the temperature 760 mm (2-1/2 ft) above the floor

peaked at 57°C (135°F) which is tolerable for a few minutes if a person

choses to escape along the floor. For all of the samples tested the maximum

temperature reached at this "crawl level" was in Exp. S18 (100% acrylic)

where the peak was 75°C (167°F)

As expected, in general the doorway temperatures were slightly lower

than corresponding temperatures in the center of the room. The timetemperature profiles for all tests (curves) for the doorway were very similar

to that in figure 11.

Is the room temperature high enough to cause a flashover, i.e., complete

involvement of everything in the room? The maximum upper room temperature

listed in table 10 is the average of the peak temperature 25 mm (1 in) below

the ceiling and the corresponding mid-height temperature. These values range

from a low of 76°C to a high of 392°C. Fang [4] indicates that an upper room

temperature of 450-650°C is required for flashover. Only a few of these

temperatures approached this range. The two experiments with heavy 100%

acrylic fabric generated 371 and 392°C.

Another measure of impending flashover is the rate of heat generation.

In the NBS testing of fire in Navy compartments, [12] a heat generation of

40 x 10^ J/min (38 000 Btu/min) was found to cause flashover in a 3 x 3 x

3 m (10 x 10 x 10 ft) compartment. This value projected [4] to the 3 x 4.9 m

(10 x 16 ft) room used for C/Ds is 64 x 10 6 J/min (55 500 Btu/min) . One

drape as indicated in table 6 had a heat generation higher than this critical

value, i.e., Exp. S18 with 70.6 x 10 6 J/min (61 200 Btu/min). Flashover was not reached in this experiment, however, as the maximum burning rate lasted

for only 12 seconds and was interrupted by part of the panel falling to the

floor

6
4.5. Total Heat Flux and Radiant Flux

Figures 12 and 13 show flux curves that are typical of all experiments.

The total heat flux meter was located directly above the drapery and was

acted on by hot combustion gases, flame impingement and radiant energy from

the flame and smoke. In table 12 peak value ranged from 1.30 W/cm2 for the

100% acetate drapery (Exp. 12) to 14.37 for the 100% acrylic (Exp. S18). In

these tests the wall panels were exposed to flame fronts from 0.8 to 10

seconds — minimum duration — using the right-hand panel burning time.

The radiometer located 1.5m (5 ft) from the wall was aimed at the cen- tertops of the draperies. It measured peak values ranging from 0.11 to 1.91

W/cm2 and in all cases the heavier weights produced the highest radiant flux

for any one type of fabric.

The maximum rate of increase in total heat or radiant flux was calculated

from the slope of the line drawn through points A and B in figs. 12 and 13.

Although the utility of this rate data is questionable, the data are included

for completeness in table 12.

4.6. Smoke Generation

The amount of smoke developed was measured by using a photometer based on

the light attenuation principle. The flux was determined by measuring the

decrease in emf from a photodetector cell corresponding to the decrease in

transmittance from a collimated light beam passing through the smoke. The

quantity of smoke is proportional to the optical density of the smoke per unit

path length or

OD/L 1 Logl o

where I o Incident Flux

I = Transmitted Flux

L = Path Length

OD/L = Optical Density per Unit Length.

The photometer was positioned vertically just inside the door on its

centerline and had an effective path length of 2.34 m (7 ft). As was the case with hot gases, visual smoke started accumulating at the ceiling level,

and as the quantity increased, the smoke layer stratified. When the smoke

layer reached the top of the doorway 0.33 m (13 in) below the ceiling, exhausting through the doorway became more rapid. Figures 14, 15, and 16 show the

buildup of smoke that occurred in Experiment S17. These photographs may also

be related to the curves of optical density and drapery consumption in

figure 17.

Table 13 indicates the lightweight 100% acetate drape (Exp. 12) produced

the least amount of smoke while the S3 test with the 50% cotton/50% polyester

produced the most.

King [5] burned various plastics and wood in the NBS smoke density

chamber and measured the gravimetric concentration, i.e., grams of smoke per

cubic meter. When all burning conditions were kept constant, this particulate smoke mass divided by the optical density approached a constant. Then,

if the smoke concentration is doubled, the OD value measured should be twice

as large. Reviewing the OD values in table 13, this principle x would imply

the heavy 50% cotton/50% polyester (Exp. S17 at OD/L = 0.79 m ) peaked at

7
4.6 times the amount of smoke of Exp. S16 at OD/L = 0 . 17 m

1

. An examination

of photographs, figures 8 and 16, verifies this trend.

In spite of high smoke concentration, i.e., OD/L in the range of 0.50 m

and above, the smoke was stratified and there was a visually clear path near

the floor. This path generally ranged from 0.60 to 1.2 m (2 to 4 feet) high

and was always present.

It was evident that within the group of 20 tests in the experimental

design, heavier draperies produced more smoke than lightweight fabrics.

The cotton/polyester blend and the acrylic also generated more than other

fabrics of the same weight.

4.7. Gas Analysis

During the initial stages of planning the experiments, i.e., with

respect to toxic gas exposure, it was decided to consider the potential risk

to a person entering the doorway. Within the doorway it was surmised the CO

and C02 concentrations might not be high enough to measure by the instrumentation available — except at the very top of the door opening. This

should be the point of highest concentration. Later in the series of experiments a second suction tube was installed 14 cm (5-1/2 in) below the first

tube to investigate the vertical distribution of these toxic gases.

Examination of figures 18 and 19 indicate the CO and C0 2 concentrations

continuously monitored at the top of the door build up very rapidly to a peak

value. As the fire subsides dilution occurs and the concentrations slowly

decrease. The shapes of the curves of concentrations measured 14 cm (5-1/2

in) below the doorway top were very similar except for lower values. Table

14 lists peak concentrations for each experiment. Measured at the top of the

doorway, CO concentrations ranged from 200 ppm for the rayon/polyester sheet

(Exp. 15) to 7400 ppm for Exp. S3-100% acrylic. The CO curve for S3 had a pinnacle type peak which dropped from 7400 ppm to 2200 ppm in 10 seconds.

The C02 peak concentrations varied from a low of 1.8% to a high of 9.60% with

the major number of draperies producing 5-7% at the top of the doorway.

Concentrations of CO and C0 2 at the point 14 cm (5-1/2 in) below the

door top were not consistently lower than those at the door top. This was

likely due to differences in turbulence and gas velocities which made accurate

extrapolation to lower elevations, i.e., nose level of the average human,

difficult.

As would be expected, the amount of oxygen in the gases expelled from

the room decreased as the C0 2 and CO increased. At low concentrations of CO

the volume percentages of C0 2 and 0 2 should total 20.9% or the normal 0 2 concentration in air. (A volume of 0 2 used in burning will produce an equal

volume of C0 2 . ) This was generally true indicating the accuracy of the gas

concentration measurements.

When the four 100% acrylic draperies were burned, chromatographic color

tubes were employed at the 14-cm location to measure hydrogen cyanide concentration. Values ranged from 15 to 40 parts per million.

4.8. Draperies as Flashover Promoters

In 1971 [6] fire tests were conducted in one of the rooms of the defunct

Pioneer International Hotel in Tucson, Arizona. They involved typical hotel

furniture, primarily a sofa, end table and a drapery hanging behind the sofa.

At 10 minutes from ignition time only the end of the sofa and end table were burning and the fire could be approached quite closely. Hot gases were

8
collecting and stratifying at the ceiling. At 10:12 the fire flashed up the

preheated draperies and a flashover occurred. It was suggested the flashover

time would have been delayed if the drapery had not carried the flame to the

ceiling. Emmons [7] following a full-scale burn test conducted in a bedroom,

also suggests that the presence of draperies or curtains materially decreases

the time to flashover.

To test this theory a small upholstered chair with urethane cushion and

back was burned with and without a drapery. (Two identical chairs were purchased.) The 3.0 x 4.9 m (10 x 16 ft) room, figure 1, was used for conducting

the tests. However, the addition of a gypsum board wall down the center of the

room decreased the room to 2.4 x 3.0 m (8 x 10 ft). It was opined that the

small chair, being the major source of fuel, would not create a flashover con- dition in the large room. In both experiments the chair was placed 21.6 cm

(8-1/2 in) from the back wall facing the left front of the room at 45°. The

back corner of the chair was 18 cm (7 in) to the right of the drapery rod

centerline. The ignition source in both cases was a polyethylene wastepaper

basket containing 20 dismantled quart-sized milk containers. It was placed

11.4 cm (4-1/2 in) to the right of the chair. To insure ignition of the chair

by the flaming waste container a 61 x 84 cm (24 x 33 in) aluminum sheet metal

reflector was placed in a vertical plane and 10 cm (4 in) to the right of the

wastebasket. In Experiment No. 16 one panel of the same 100% cotton drapery

used in previous Experiment No. 7 was hung directly behind the chair. There

was approximately 8 cm (3 in) of clearance between the drape and chair.

Examination of the movie film and the digatal clock gave the ignition

and flashover times listed in table 20. As full ignition of fires have a wide range of preflashover times "striking of the match" is not considered a reliable starting point. In these two trials ignition of the chair seats

more nearly represents full involvement and is considered the start point for

measuring time to flashover. In Experiment 20, i.e., without the drape, the

time to flashover was 3 minutes 25 seconds; whereas, with the drape it occurred

in 2 min 7 s — difference of 1 min 18 s. In Experiment No. 7 when this same drapery was ignited alone the right-hand panel burned in 22 seconds. In Exp.

16 the panel, preheated by the burning chair, was consumed in 2 to 3 seconds.

Because of the variability of burns no definite conclusions should be

drawn from these two trials except that a trend is indicated.

Table 21 lists data obtained from the two experiments. At the time of

flashover, temperatures in the center of the room and doorway were in the

range of 837°C (1540°F) to 998°C (1830°F). The maximum total heat flux

reached 13.37 W/cm 2 in the chair experiment — not as high as the peak of

Exp. 18, 100% acrylic drape, which was 14.37 W/cm 2

. Radiant energy at 9 and

11 W/cm 2 was much higher than obtained in the drapery experiments as were

the carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide concentrations.

4.9. Test Results

1. Theorical burning times for the lightweight C/Ds 1.56 to 3.70 oz/yd 2 varied from 11 to 42 seconds and from 22 to 138 seconds for the heavy

draperies 7.64 to 10.9 oz/yd 2

. Corresponding mass burning rates were

0.45 to 0.91 kg/min for lightweight C/Ds and 0.40 to 2.29 for heavies

2. Areas under the heat flux meter curves indicate lightweight C/Ds gave

values from 28 to 227 J/cm2

; whereas, heavy draperies ranged from

177 to 483 J/cm 2

.

9
3. Of the 12 lightweight C/Ds tested 10 failed to ignite any of the 10 test

panels. The other two ignited one each. Excluding the two foam back

draperies, Exp. 18 and 19, the heavy draperies ignited an average of

5.5 panels out of 10.

4. Samples S18 (100% acrylic) and #11 (73% rayon/27% cotton) produced the

greatest number of ignitions (8 panels ignited)

5. A lined drapery #7 (100% cotton) and foam backed draperies #18 (63%

cotton/37% polyester), #19 (60% rayon/40% cotton) by producing 3, 1 and

0 ignitions in the test panels gave an indication that lined or backed

draperies are less of a hazard than unlined draperies of the same weight.

6. On the basis of panels ignited, it appears that no judgment can be made

concerning whether closed or open draperies are more hazardous.

7. Peak radiant flux varied from 0.11 to 0.74 for lightweight C/Ds and .20

to 1.86 for heavy draperies.

8. Peak smoke generation as optical density was 0.14 to 1.19 for lightweight

C/Ds and 0.23 to infinite for heavyweight draperies.

9. Peak carbon monoxide measured at the top of the doorway opening had a range of 200 to 2400 ppm for lightweight samples and 1000 to 7400 for

heavyweight materials.

5. CONCLUSIONS

The following conclusions have been drawn from this research.

5.1.

Ignition of Wall and Ceiling Materials

1. Heavyweight wall hangings ignited wall and ceiling material, whereas

lightweight ones usually did not.

2. Two test burns indicate a C/D may provide a fire path to the combustible

gases collecting at the ceiling and thus may decrease the time to

flashover; thus a person would have less time to escape from the room. After flashover, fire may spread rapidly throughout a house.

5.2.

Smoke Generation

Heavyweight draperies produced more smoke than lightweight materials.

In addition, fabrics containing significant quantities of polyester and acrylic

fibers generated more smoke than cottons, rayons, and acetates. In the early

stages of a fire, smoke accumulates near the ceiling and, again, a person can escape the room of fire origin by exiting at the floor level.

5.3.

Gas Analysis

As expected, heavy draperies produced high air temperatures, more smoke,

and higher levels of toxic gases. No consistency was found between types of

fiber and the amount of toxic gases produced. Gas concentrations measured

near the top of the doorway were found low enough for exit before flashover.

10
5.4. Drapery Ignition — Open Versus Closed

In all cases that were compared., draperies in the open position generated

more heat than when closed as measured by the total heat flux meter.

6 . ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to thank Douglas Bostian, William Bailey, Thomas Maher

and others for their assistance in performing the experiments, Samuel Steel

and Sue Alderson for consultation on instrumentation, and James Slater and

Margaret Hackleroad for computer programming and many others for consultation.

7. REFERENCES

[1] Moore, L. Dow and Vickers, Allan K. , A Survey of Fire Accidents Involving

Curtains and Draperies — Deaths, Injuries and Financial Loss, Nat. Bur.

Stand. (U.S.), NBSIR 75-902, Final Report (Nov. 1975).

[2] Lie, T. T., Fire and Buildings (Applied Science Publishers L.T.D.,

London , 1972) .

[3] Loftus, Joseph, Nat. Bur. Stand., private communication.

[4] Fang, Jim B. , Fire Buildup in a Room and the Role of Interior Finish

Materials, Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.), Technical Note 879 (June 1975).

[5] King, T. Y. , Empirical Relationships Between Optical Density and Mass

Density of Smoke, J. Fire and Flamm. , Vol. 6 (April 1975), pp . 222-227.

[6] The Patton Report, No. 18, (published by Patton Life Safety Inc.,

Columbus, Ohio, Aug. 1971).

[7] Emmons, Howard W. , Fire and Fire Protection, Scientific American (July

1974) , 21.

[8] Pryor, A. J. and Yuill, C. H. , Mass Fire Life Hazard, OCD Work Unit

2537A, Final Report, OCD Contract N228 (62479) 68665, Southwest Research

Institute, San Antonio, Texas (1966).

[9] Claudy, W. D. , Respiratory Hazard of the Fire Services, National Fire

Protection Association, Boston (1957).

[10] Custer, R. L. P. and Bright, Richard G., Fire Detection: State-of-theArt , Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.), Technical Note 839 (June 1974).

[11] Patty, F. A., Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology, In: Toxicology,

Vol. II, p. 1998.

[12] Lee, B. T. and Parker, W. J. , Naval Shipboard Fire Risk Criteria —

Berthing Compartment Fire Study and Performance Guidelines, Nat. Bur.

Stand. (U.S.), NBSIR 76-1052 (Sept. 1976).

11
Table 1. Fabric Selection for 5x2x2 Factorial Experimental Design

5 FABRICS

100% Cotton

50% Cotton/50% Polyester

100% Acrylic

59% Rayon/41% Cotton

100% Polyester

2 FABRIC WEIGHT

Heavy: Range 0.25 to 0.35 kg/m2 (7.3 to 10.4 oz/yd 2

) Light: Range 0.10 to 0.13 kg/m 2 (2.9 to 3.7 oz/yd 2

)

2 DRAPE POSITIONS

Closed

Open

Total Experiments: 5x2x2 = 20

Supplemental Experiments: 18

Table 2. Wall and Ceiling Test Panels

Panel No. 1 - White pine window molding 1.6 cm x 5.7 cm x

91 cm (5/8 in x 2-1/4 in x 36 in) painted

with 2 coats of white latex

Panel No. 3 - "Chestnut finished" 4 mm (5/32 in) untreated

plywood, Class C, flame spread 200, fuel

contribution 125, smoke rating 200

Panel No. 4 - Common 13 mm (1/2 in) wallboard - white

surfaced

Panel No. 5 - White textured ceiling tile, 13 mm (1/2 in)

Class A

Panel No. 6 - White screen finish ceiling tile, 13 mm

(1/2 in) , Class D

Panel No. 7-6 mm (1/4 in) Masonite smooth both sides

(oil treated)

12
Table 3. Weight of Curtains and Draperies Burned

Type Fiber Experiment

Number

Position Weight Weight

Fabric

(oz/yd 2 )

Drape

Weight

(kg)

100% Cotton S16 Closed Light 3.64 .773

S 8 Heavy 7.64 1.475

S13 Open Light 3.64 .754

S 5 Heavy 7.64 1.460

50% Cotton/

50% Polyester S20 Closed Light 3.45 .836 S17 Heavy 9.65 1.764

S19 Open Light 3.45 . 810

S 3 Heavy 9.65 1.751

100% Acrylic

S 4 Closed Light 2.92 .631 S18 Heavy 10. 42 2.366

Sll Open Light 2.92 . 631

S 9 Heavy 10.42 2.344

59% Rayon/

41% Cotton

S 1 Closed Light 3.70 .725 S15 Heavy 8.47 1.612

S 2 Open Light 3.70 .720 S10 Heavy 8.47 1.582

100% Polyester

S14 Closed Light** 3.17 .612 S12 Heavy 7.33 -

S 7 Open Light 3.17 .601

S 6 Heavy 7.33 ~

100% Cotton

Cotton Lining 7 Closed 9.20 1.566

Rayon Flocking 8 Closed 10.80 1.90 on Rayon/

Polyester 14 Closed 7.87 1.50

87% R/13% Acetate 9 Closed 8.70 1.776

73% R/27%

Cotton 11 Closed 9.12 2.01

100% Acetate 12 Closed 3.42 .640

100% Fiberglass*** 13 Closed 5.24 . 970

70% R/30%

Polyester

E. (sheer) 15 Closed 1.56 . 276

63% C/37%

Polyester E. & Foamt 18 Closed 8.97 1.575

60% R/40%

Polyester

& Foamt 19 Closed 8.35 1.376

60% R. Flocking 10 Closed 10.9 1.860 on Fiberglass 17 Closed 10.9 1.887

To correct to kilograms/meter 2 multiply by 0.034

Flame would not propagate upward for more than a few inches

* Would not ignite with a match

Corrected for filler in foam backing

13
Table 4. Burning Time: Aerial and Mass Burning Rates

Type Fiber Exp. No. Position Weight Theorical Mass

R. Panel Burning

Burning* Rate (Max)

Time (s) (kg/min)

100% Cotton S16 Closed Light 34 .68

S 8 Heavy 94 .47

S13 Open Light 40 .57

S 5 Heavy 80 .55

50% Cotton/

50% Polyester S20 Closed Light 30 .84

S17 Heavy 50 1.06

S19 Open Light 26 . 95

S 3 Heavy 71 .74

100% Acrylic S 4 Closed Light 42 .45

SI 8 Heavy 31 2.29

Sll Open Light 27 .70

S 9 Heavy “

54% Rayon/

41% Cotton S 1 Closed Light 27 .80

S15 Heavy 97 .50

S 2 Open Light 33 .66

S10 Heavy 66 .72

100% Polyester S14 Closed Light 33 .56

S12 Heavy** - - S 7 Open Light 20 . 91

S 6 Heavy

100% Cotton

Cotton Lining 7 All

Closed

22 2.17

Rayon Flocking on 8 26 2.23

Rayon/Polyester 14 41 1.10

87% R/13%

Acetate 9 133 .40

73% R/27%

Cotton 11 89 .68

100% Acetate 12 37 .52

100% Fiberglasst 13 - -

70% R/30%

Poly E (Sheer) 15 11 .76

63% C/37%

Poly E & Foam 18 40 1.18

60% R/40% Poly

E & Foam 19 41 1.01

60% R. Flocking 10 All 111 .50 on Fiberglass 17 Closed 138 .41

Burning time of

* * right panel at maximum burning rate

Flame would not propagate upward for more than a few inches.

Would not ignite with a match.

14
Table 5. Heat of Combustion of Various Fabrics

by Oxygen Bomb Method [3]*

Type Fabric J/kg x (10 6

) Btu/lb

Acrylic 30.76 13254

Modacrylic 24.72 10650

Polyester 21.59 9300

Rayon 15.43 6650

Acetate 17.78 7660

Triacetate 18.10 7800

Nylon 6 30.14 12989

Spandex 31.43 13540

Cotton 16.53 7122

Wool 20.82 8972

* Ethyl Acrylate 29.81 12500

* Not corrected for water vapor.

* * Reference: NBS Journal of Research, Vol. 2, p. 359 (1929)

assumed close in value to 4 or 5 other C 5 H 8 O 2 compounds.

(Et. Acrylate used as foam backing on drapes - experiment

18 and 19)

15
Table 6. Energy to Wall and Number of Test Panels Ignited

Type Fiber Exp. No. Curtain

Configuration

Weight

Max Rate

of Heat

Generation

(xlO 6

, J/min)

Number of Wall

and Ceiling

Panels Ignited

100% Cotton SI 6 Closed Light 11.27 1 S 8 Heavy 7.79 7 SI 3 Open Light 9.44 0 S 5 Heavy 9.11 7

50% Cotton/

50% Polyester S20 Closed Light 16.04 1 S17 Heavy 20.25 5 S19 Open Light 18.15 0 S 3 Heavy 14.13 7

100% Acrylic S 4 Closed Light 13.87 0 SI 8 Heavy 70.60 8 Sll Open Light 21.58 0 S 9 Heavy “ 7

59% Rayon/

41% Cotton S 1 Closed Light 12.82 0 S15 Heavy 7.96 6 S 2 Open Light 10.57 0 S10 Heavy 11.46 2 100% Polyester SI 4 Closed Light 12.11 0 S12 Heavy - -

S 7 Open Light - -

S 6 Heavy - “

100% Cotton

Cotton Lining 7 Closed 35.96 3 Rayon Flocking

on Rayon/ 8 Closed 39.45 2 Polyester 14 Closed 19.76 7 87% R/13%

Acetate 9 Closed 6.31 4 73% R/27% Cotton

(case) 11 Closed 10.72 8 100% Acetate 12 Closed 9.27 0 70% R/30%

Poly E. (Sheer) 15 Closed 13.16 0 63% C/37% Poly

E. & Foam 18 Closed 23.12 1 60% R/ 40% Poly

E. & Foam 19 Closed 19.55 0 60% R. Flocking 10 Closed 7.74 5 on Fiberglass 17 Closed 6.34 5

16
Table 7. Ranking of Samples According

to Area Under Heat Flux Meter Curves

Experiment Number Fabric Weight"1” (oz/yd 2

)

Area Under Heat

Flux Curve

( J/cm2

)

Number

6" x 6" Panels

Ignited

15 1.56 28 0

* 12 (#24) 3.42 36 0 S14 3.17 67 0

S 7 3.17 71 0 S 2 3.70 73 0 S 4 2.92 78 0 S13 3.64 91 0

S19 3.45 113 0 Sll 2.92 115 0 S 1 (#23) 3.70 119 0 S16 3.64 168 1 19 8.35 177 0 18 8.97 197 1 S10 8.47 197 2 S 5 7.64 225 7 S20 3.45 227 1 S 3 9.65 264 7 S17 9.65 277 5

7 9.20 306 3 11 (#21) 9.12 313 8

9 8.70 314 4 17 10.90 359 5 S 9 10.42 359 7 S 8 (#22) 7.64 365 7

8 10.80 396 2 S15 8.47 406 6 10 10.90 408 5 14 7.87 416 7 S18 10.42 483 8 +To convert to kilograms/meter 2 multiply by 0.034.

* Verification experiments (full panels and ceiling area)

17
Table 8. Number of High and Low Panels Ignited

by Heavy and Light Draperies

Heavyweight Lightweight

Closed Open Closed Open

CEILING SAMPLES

4C Wallboard

7C Hardboard - Oil Treated

5C Ceiling Tile (Class A)

6C Ceiling Tile (Class D)

WALL SAMPLES (HIGH POSITION)

4H Wallboard

7H Hardboard - Oil Treated

3H Plywood Paneling (Class C)

1 Window Molding

WALL SAMPLES (LOW POSITION)

4L Wallboard

7L Hardboard - Oil Treated

3L Plywood Paneling (Class C)

4

4

4

3

4

3

3

1

3

3

4

3

3

2

4

1

1

1

18
Table

9.

Verification

of

Panel

inco

•»H -p

•riG

Cr>

X) - -iH ID (/) X W = o

10 Oj

CD rH

xi

rH *H h w 3 in tX O

Oj

"3* P

<D

X

T5 P G i-1 P Ch

(0 -P

CD eg > E CO <j\ in <J\ vo P O in rH VO VO rH iH vo ro P \ CM ro ro ro CN rH U P

-P

03 r—

CD eg

•X rH \ 05 IX !5

CD

—

(X

4-1 04 0 Ej P Eh

—

CD

U

-P E ° G 0

'-H

CD 0 u (X

w

ro o (T\H1 a\ o

ro 00O rH (—

in ro • • • • • • • • ro in vo H1 CN rH

cr> 00 ro

CJ\ a\ CNoo ^ LOr- + a) E

eg

G eg C\J

p eg \ G T3 0 T) \ G 03 03 TJ eg o c 0 S -P >H G 0 >H -P tx P

•H 0 -P \ -P \ 0 -p \ a) \ 0) p >c-P n 0 N >H-P N O N P Xi 03 0 0 U 0 03 0 0 < 0 0)

0) (X

u exu • E

IX CN cH> o 0P CN P S <#> dP rH O ID dP 0IP t" o 0 W

ro r* • O • o o • O • 0 g

r- CN <5> rH r- LO in ro rH ro rH (0 4H P

0o

03 0 > 1—1 O 0 •r) <d XI Xi

XI 05 g 0

j3 rH £ p 2 CD O j- c in -p

-P os

m ID

p

C C4 rH *.

*

a) <d rH •H CN 00 ro i—

N1 CN > e rH X CM «H CN CN CN r-H E G

•H rH cnC

O

p 3 in in o

0) &4 rH ID

04 • o X rH Eh

roo

in A

Ch

•rH P

19
Table 10. Doorway and Center of Room Temperatures

Peak Peak Center

Type Fiber Exp . NoPosition Weight Doorway of Room Max . Upper

Temp . * * Temp . ** Room Temp.***

(°C) (°C) (°C)

100% Cotton S16 Closed Light 52 64 166

S 8 Heavy 86 93 220

SI 3 Open Light 41 49 168

S 5 Heavy 75 69 238

50% Cotton/

50% Polyester

S20 Closed Light 134 113 196

S17 Heavy 171 158 261

SI 9 Open Light 44 59 225

S 3 Heavy 122 115 333

100% Acrylic

S 4 Closed Light 124 116 159

SI 8 Heavy 306 288 371

Sll Open Light 91 90 131

S 9 Heavy 249 253 392

59% Rayon/41%

Cotton

S 1 Closed Light 83 82 179

S15 Heavy 121 130 188

S 2 Open Light 39 45 184

S10 Heavy 41 58 209

100% Polyester

S14 Closed Light 116 95 145

S12 Heavy - - -

S 7 Open Light 39 44 152

S 6 Heavy - - 100% Cotton/

Cotton Lining 7 Closed 125 249 353

Rayon Flocking

on Rayon

Backing

8 14 Closed

Closed

221

167

230

151

319

295

87% R/13% Acetate 9 Closed 83 76 166

73% R/27% Cotton

(Case) 11 Closed 140 114 234

100% Acetate 12 Closed 82 75 88

70% R/30% Poly

E. (Sheer) 15 Closed 53 48 76

63% C/37% Poly

E. & Foam 18 Closed 142 131 223

60% R/ 40% Poly

E. & Foam 19 Closed 153 149 209

60% R. Flocking 10 Closed 90 101 223 on Fiberglass 17 Closed 108 118 189

Flame would not propagate

caused extinguishment.

**

upward for more than a few inches before melting and dripping

Measured 1.65 m (65") above floor.

* Average of temperatures 25 mm (1") below ceiling and at midpoint in room.

20
Table 11. Physiological Effects

of Elevated Temperatures [8]

60°C (140°F) Heat stroke possible

8 2 °C (180°F) 49 min tolerance time

100°C (212°F) Very rapid skin burns in humid

air

115 °F (240°F) 20 min tolerance time

125 °C (260°F) Nasal breathing difficult

150°C (300°F) Mouth breathing difficult - Temperature limit for escape

160°C (320°F) Rapid unbearable pain to dry skin

200°C (390°F) Tolerance time less than 4 min

with wet skin - Respiratory

system threshold 200°C)

21
Table 12. Peak Radiant Flux Generated by Drape (Measured

5 Feet above Floor and 5 Inches from Drape)

Total Peak Heat Flux Measured above Drape

Rate to Type Fiber Exp . No

Position Weight Peak

Radiant

(W/cm 2

)

Rate to Peak

Radiant Flux

(W/cm 2min)

Peak Total

Heat Flux

(W/cra2

)

Peak Total

Heat Flux

(W/cm2 min)

100% Cotton S16 Closed Light . 34 . 84 4.70 24.5

S 8 Heavy . 34 . 42 6.19 4.1

S13 Open Light . 32 1.73 5.44 33.3

S 5 Heavy . 46 1.02 6.21 16.8

50% Cotton/

50% Polyester S20 Closed Light . 63 3.45 8.82 40.4

S17 Heavy .76 3.45 9.19 31.1

S19 Open Light .74 6.75 8.69 68.9

S 3 Heavy 1.32 4.35 7.79 19.8

100% Acrylic S 4 Closed Light . 27 . 35 1.45 2.1

S18 Heavy 1.86 5.65 14.37 62.1

Sll Open Light . 28 1.00 2.30 7.8

S 9 Heavy 1.91 7.90 11.45 30.6

59% Rayon/41%

Cotton S 1 Closed Light . 30 . 75 4.59 12.6

S15 Heavy .39 .75 5.61 22.0

S 2 Open Light . 36 2.18 4.04 27.7

S10 Heavy .40 1.09 5.36 23.9

100% Polyester S14 Closed Light .25 3.30 3.41 43.1

S12 Heavy - - - -

S 7 Open Light . 38 1.70 6.77 87.3

S 6 Heavy - - - - 100% Cotton

Cotton Lining 7 Closed 1.12 1.54 8.02 12.6

Rayon Flocking

on Rayon/ 8 Closed . 97 5.18 8.91 39.5

Polyester 14 Closed .89 2.18 10.29 36.2

87% R/13%

Acetate 9 Closed . 20 - 3.16 5.8

73% R/27% Cotton

(Case) 11 Closed - - 3.80 16.8

100% Acetate 12 Closed . 11 . 32 1.30 4.3

70% R/30% Poly

E. (Sheer) 15 Closed .12 1.2 1.70 11.3

63% C/37% Poly

E. & Foam 18 Closed .94 3.60 10.00 57.0

60% R/40% Poly

E . & Foam 19 Closed . 83 5.30 9.58 51.2

60% R. Flocking 10 Closed . 56 2.50 7.14 27.9 on Fiberglass 17 Closed . 50 2.63 8.50 47.8

Flame would not propagate upward for more than a few inches before melting and dripping

caused extinguishment.

22
Table 13. Peak Smoke Generation

Type Fiber Experiment

Number

Position Weight Minimum

Light

Transmission

Peak Smoke

Optical Density,

OD/m

100% Cotton S16 Closed Light 40.1 .17

S 8 Heavy 30.7 .22

S13 Open Light 59.9 .10

S 5 Heavy 37.1 . 18

50% Cotton/50%

Polyester S20 Closed Light 17.4 .32

S17 Heavy 1.4 .79

S19 Open Light 11.0 •41 * S 3 Heavy < 0.01 > 2.00

100 Acrylic S 4 Closed Light 13.7 .37

S18 Heavy 1.8 .75

Sll Open Light 17.0 .33

S 9 Heavy 0.9 .87

59% Rayon/41%

Cotton S 1 Closed Light 48.2 . 14

S15 Heavy 58.3 .10

S 2 Open Light 42.8 .16

S10 Heavy 28.3 .23

100% Polyester S14 Closed Light** 6.6 . 51

S12 Heavy - - S 7 Open Light** 27.7 .24

S 6 Heavy - - 100% Cotton

Cotton Lining 7 Closed 30.7 .22

Rayon Flocking

on Rayon/ 8 Closed 5.5 . 54

Polyester 14 Closed 3.5 .62

87% R/13% Acetate 9 Closed 19.8 .30

73% R/27% Cotton

(Case) 11 Closed 21.6 .28

100% Acetate 12 Closed 73.8 .06

70% R/30% Poly

E. (Sheer) 15 Closed 62.9 .09

63% C/37% Poly

E. & Foam 18 Closed 23.1 .27

60% R/ 40% Poly E.

& Foam 19 Closed 22.3 .28

60% R. Flocking 10 Closed 12.4 . 39 on Fiberglass 17 Closed 22.3 .28

k Estimate

* * Flame would not propagate upward for more than a few inches before melting and

dripping caused extinguishment.

23
Table

14.

Toxic

Gas

and

Oxygen

Depletion

Produced

by

Burning

Draperies

—

Peak

Concentrations

c rH 0.1 0 0) 03 0 —

CPT3 CQ E- 6 0 -H a

M C B U Q< t id u o —

>1 > 0

X. CJ a

in oo o n m h ^

>1

O U dP

E* 0 —

oQ

CC (Ti CC VO C" 00 m O'* CO C- VD VD Oh k* m ro VD (NCOC^O m in H r-l rl in ^ in o oo r- r- <n

r—I rl rI rH H H H H

rH 00 ^ <Tv rr m i—i o m co

id io m oo

<T\ O

00

<N CO O CO o in os co

ro co m

in cm co

cm o

3o a

r-4 0

a) e-> 03 CD Tt ^ <*> •H B 0

X 0 0

0 Q

•H *!• Q r—

C

oX >• u id

03 a 3 —

U 0 *4 <#> Ei 0

0o

3o a

. 0

<1) CJ tr ~

T3 m 6

•H n a

X B o a

0 0 0'-

c D

0 "31 X rH

* * o

cm r-* vo

• • I •

rH cr. oo m

cn m co ^ in in in

o o o

O O O | CM 00 VO

* o m h

O'* rH O'* *3*

CM VO rH in

in V£> VD CTi

O O O

O O | o', in

CM

*

CM rH | | co in

CM VD CM r*

o o

o o I I in vo

vd vo r— o h h r- co

O* O'* O'* VD -H co VO o

co

X*u

03 CJ

>1

«3 ^

a s e o u a

eh o a

oa

o o o o

o o o o

I 00 ^1

* CM CM H CM

o o o o

o o o o

rH O'* rH ^3* H CM CM rO O O O

*3- rH CM 00

rH CM

* * «

CM O

Is* CM Is* I .H | CO | CM ^3* rH CM CM

vo co m r- co in

cm m r-" oo Is i vo i M' M1 in VO CM CM

O O

I o | C I I I I CO VO

o o o o o o

O O O O O I O I r^- co o'* o in oo rH CM

* «

CM O 00 rH

*

CO o\

CM ro O'*

*

00 I oo vo vo in

VO O O' o

O 00 CM CO

rH ^3* VO

ao cc rH O CM O

vo r* ^

oc vo ro vo vo ^ in

o

o I CM o o

o o

00 vo

o o o o

o o o o

in in co cm M1 CM CO H

O

CO O

o

CM O

o o

o o oo o

« « P

X P >,P >i P >iP pH P >1 •p >i-p ^

* * P >,P >,

IT x: > x: > x: > x: > x > x > £ > J3 > x i> x >

•H 0"* *0 IT 0^ *13 O'* CP <0 cr O' id O’ <d C7> <T3 <33 <u •H 03 *H 03 *H (13 *H 03 •H 03 •h a) •rl # -d # •H 03 -H 03 5 J 33 J X JE 4 K X E x e 0 X 41 JUS

T3 T3 'O V T3 'O T> T3 T3 T3 T3 T3 T3

<13 03 03 03 03 03 03 0 0) 0) 03 03 0) 4) 0) 03 in c in c in c in c in c in in (1) in cn in in CO m in in 0 03 0 4) 0 03 0 03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

rH a rH a rH a rH a rH a rH rH iH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH

cj o CJ o CJ o u o u o u u o o u o u u u CJ u

P

C

03B

•HU

03a

xw

u

03 X

z

vo 00 ro in O t"'- O'* CO M1 CO H O'

•H rH CM rH rH rH rH WWWW C/DC/DC/DC/D C/DC/DC/DC/D

rH in CM O M1 CM VD

rH rH rH rH cocococo cocococo

oo O' h

u

a) XI•H

Ut

CDa

Eh dPO

O

0 n P G

<D IC3 0 cr U P cr CP -U P P >i >i c m

03 03 G c in 0) P rH rH rH •h m

-P O P •H •H d) o 0 03 0 0 0 \ in •H \ c cn c c < u P 04 — c* 04 U rH c 03 rH <*> 0 03 0 H 0 .H K3 u B E o tr 0 >1 C P P PI o o dP P dP 03 dP #0 dP H M 4-» rH U 0 -P rH -P rH 0. cn r- —' 0) O 0) r- o o o Ci4 03 4J o V >1 0 0 o c \ rH CM 03 o cn jc cn Cl, H3* pL| X 0 Od < rtJ CJ cu U 0 c \ \ in < \ C/D \ \ • *ft CJ -p c o CC, cc CC U ca a: *-0 a: b dP OP OP dP dP p o >, CJ dP

<#> O o dP rH O o o >1 id dP dP ^ o dP . dP • dP • dP G o m o cr* *3* o o CJ id « h cn o o M cn W o w o o in rH in rH rH 00 rH r- vo vo vo

24

One

liter

grab

samples

taken

at

or

near

visual

peak

of

smoke

generation.

Flame

would

not

propagate

upward

for

more

than

a

few

inches

before

melting

and

dripping

caused

extinguishment.

One

liter

grab

samples

taken

at

or

near

visual

peak

of

smoke

generation.
Table 15. Effect of Carbon Monoxide

Exposure on Humans [9]

Parts per Million Time Effects

200 2 - 3 hr. Mild headache

800 4 5 min Mild headache

2 hr. Death possible

3200 10 - 15 min Dizziness

30 min Death

6900 1-2 min Dizziness

10 - 15 min Death

12800 2-3 Breaths Unconscious

1-3 min Death

Table 16. Effect of Carbon Dioxide

Exposure on Humans [9]

Percent Concentration Effects

0.5 Increase depth of breathing

3.0 Breathing rate doubles

5.0 300% increase in breathing

rate

10.0 Possible death even with

sufficient atmospheric

oxygen

25
Table 17. Effects of Oxygen

Depletion on Humans* [10]

Percent Time Effect

21 17 Indefinite Respiration volume decreases,

loss of coordination and

difficulty in thinking

17 - 14 2 hr. Rapid pulse and dizziness

14 - 11 30 min Nausea, vomiting and paralysis

9 5 min Unconsciousness

6 1-2 min Death within a few minutes

These figures are only approximate as there are some variations

in the literature.

Table 18. Physiological Response to Various Concentrations

of Hydrogen Cyanide in Air - Mass [11]

Parts per Million Effects

18 - 36 Slight symptoms for several hours

45 - 54 Tolerated for 1/2 to 1 hr.

immediate or late effects

Without

110 - 135 Fatal for 1/2 to 1 hr. or later, or dangerous to life.

135 Fatal after 30 minutes

181 Fatal after 10 minutes

270 Immediately fatal

26
Table 19. Weight Losses in Chair — Drapery Burns (Exp. 16 and 20)

Waste

Basket Chair 1/2 Drape

Total Wt.

of Combustible

Exp . 20

Wt. Before 1.4 kg 19.3 kg —

(3.2 lb) (42.5 lb)

Wt. After 0 16.1 kg

(35.5 lb) —

Wt. Loss 1.4 kg 3.2 kg 4.6 kg

(3.2 lb) (7,0 lb) (10.2 lb)

Exp . 16

Wt. Before 1.4 kg 19.3 kg . 8 kg

(3.2 lb) (42.5 lb) (1.8 lb)

Wt. After 0 15.2 kg

(33.5 lb) 0 Wt. Loss 1.4 kg 4.1 kg . 8 kg 6.3 kg

(3.2 lb) (9.0 lb) (1.8 lb) (14.0 lb)

Table 20. Time to Ignition and Flashover in Chair Test

Material

Basket/Chair

Exp. 20

min sec

Basket/Chair/Drape

Exp. 16

min sec

Waste basket 0 - 0 0 1 o Chair Arm 3 - 15 3-20

Chair Seat 3 - 30 3-30

Flashover 6 - 55 5 - 32 to 5

27
Table 21. Comparison of Chair and Drapery Experiments - Temperature, Heat Flux Measurements, Toxic Gases

Maximum Values

Exp. 20 Exp. 16

1/2 Drape

* Doorway Temperature 837 °C 893 °C

Center Room Temperature 928 °C 998 °C

Upper Room Temperature

* * 866 °C 932 °C

4r 4r 4r Total Heat Flux 13.37 W/cm 2 10.47 W/cm 2 *** Radiant Flux 11.28 W/cm 2 9.06 W/cm2

Smoke .78 OD/m —

Carbon Monoxide - Door

14 mm (5-1/2") Below

Top

Top

35.000 ppm

21.000 ppm

33.000

20.000

ppm

ppm

Carbon Dioxide - Door Top

14 mm (5-1/2") Below Top

15.

15.

0%

6%

14.8%

13.2%

Measured 1.65 m (65") above floor.

** See table 7

* * * Same locations as previous experiments except radiometer aimed

horizontally.

28
C/D HAZARD ANALYSIS

Total Heat t

of C/D = t

of Door

Smoke Meter

Figure 1. C/D Hazard Analysis

0 0

CEILING

Figure 2. Instrumentation of Wall Behind Drape
m 3k

30

Figure

3.

Exp.

S16

(100%

Cotton

Print

3.64

oz/yd 2)

Figure

4,

Exp.

S16-

23

Seconds -

16

Seconds

after

Ignition
31

Figure

5.

Exp.

S16

-

27

Seconds

Figure

6.

Exp.

S16

-

44

Seconds
32

Figure

7.

Exp.

S16

-

76

Seconds

Figure

8.

Exp.

S16

-

89

Seconds
DRAPERY

-

PERCENT

CONSUMED

Figure

Smoke

Time OD/M

4 .009

8 . 005

12 .044

16 .060

20 .130

24 .144

28 .152

32 .170

36 .179

40 .162

44 .154

52 .144

60 .132

68 .136

76 .122

84 .136

92 .110

100 .116

9. Exp. S16 100% Cotton 3.64 oz/yd 2 (Light) Closed Position

Figure 10. Ceiling Tile and Wall Paneling Layout for

Verification Experiments No. 21, 22, 23 & 24

33
TOTAL

HEAT

FLUX

W/cm

2

Figure 11. Center of Room Temperature versus

Time - Exp. S17 9.65 oz/yd 2 50%

Cotton/50% Polyester

Figure 12. Heat Flux versus Time - Exp. S17

34
35
«>«

36

Figure

15.

Exp.

S17

-

103

Seconds

Figure

16.

Exp.

S17

-

116

Seconds
DRAPERY

-

PERCENT

CONSUMED

Sec . OD/m

52

56

60

64

68

72

76

80

84

88

92

96

100

104

108

112

124

136

148

160

172

184

Figure 17. Drapery Consumption and Smoke Generation - Exp. S17

50% Cotton/50% Polyester.

.038

. 054

. 065

. 071

.113

.062

.21

. 38

.59

.79

.45

.49

.56

.54

.62

.57

. 54

.53

.44

.47

.45

.47

Figure 18. CO at Top of Door (ppm) versus Time - Exp. S17

37
7.0i

o

o m o m o

<b V »o — 6

% - 301X010 NOSdYO

Figure 19. C02 at Top of Door versus Time - Exp. S17

38

TIME-SECONOS
NBS-1 1 4 A (REV 7-73)

U.S. DEPT. OF COMM

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET

1. PUBLICATION OR REPORT NO. NBSIR 78-1448

2. Gov ’t Accession

No.

3. Recipient's Accession No.

4. ITT 1.1 AND SUBTITLE

FULL-SCALE BURNING BEHAVIOR OF CURTAINS

AND DRAPERIES

5. Publication Date March 1978

6. Performing Organization Code

7. AUTHOR(S)

L. Dow Moore

8. Performing Organ. Report No.

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

WASHINGTON. D.C. 20234

1°. Proic^^J^/^rk Unit No.

11. Contract/Grant No.

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Complete Address (Street, City, State, ZIP)

Same as No. 9

13. Type of Report & Period Covered

Final Report

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

16.

ABSTRACT (A 200-word or less (actual summary o( most significant in formation. If document includes a significant

bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.)

To better understand the burning in room fire development,

38 full-scale drapery and curtain burn experiments were

conducted in a 3 x 4 . 9 m (10 x 16 ft) room. The variables

investigated included fabric and lining type, fabric weight,

and position of the draperies (open vs closed) . As each

burning experiment progressed a number of conditions were

continuously monitored such as rate of drapery consumption,

air temperature increase, smoke and toxic gas generation,

and radiant energy developed. Ignition of sample wall and

ceiling panels was also monitored.

17.

KEY WORDS (six to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only the first letter of the first key word unless a proper name; separated by semicolons) Curtains; draperies; flammable fabrics; full-scale

fires

.

18.

AVAILABILITY QxUnlimited

[77 For Official Di stribution. Do Not Release to NT1S

_7 Order From Sup. of Doc., U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402, SD Cat. No. Cl 3

[X Order From National Technical Information Service (NT IS) Springfield, Virginia 22151

19. SECURITY CLASS 21. NO. OF PAGES

(THIS REPORT)

UNCL ASSIFIED 40

20. SECURITY CLASS 22. Price (THIS PAGE)

$4.50

UNCLASSIFIED

U SCOMM- D C 29042-P74
-

•

•

•